Homepage
PR Newswire
12-09-2017, 04:34 AM
Raising the bar for SGX delistings
Current rules may not do enough to protect minority shareholders from being squeezed out
by Goh Eng Yeow
September 11, 2017, 5:00 AM SGT
Almost 5,000 investors were apparently caught still holding Aztech Holdings shares when the company was delisted in February.
If you think that was just an oversight by a fairly large number of shareholders, think again. When Aztech launched a selective capital reduction scheme last month to buy back shares from them at the same price as for the earlier delisting exercise - 42 cents a share - enough of them cast dissenting votes to block the offer.
These dissenters were irked that they were being asked to part with their shares at only 40 per cent of Aztech's revalued net asset value (RNAV), even though the independent financial adviser (IFA), Stirling Coleman Capital, had assessed the offer as being "fair and reasonable".
The situation begs various questions: Isn't it absurd that so many people are stuck with shares they cannot monetise easily? And since so many of them still have Aztech shares, doesn't it make sense to keep the company listed? In any case, why didn't they fight harder to oppose the delisting move? That would surely have saved them the heartache they suffer now.
More details in http://www.straitstimes.com/business/rai...delistings
Current rules may not do enough to protect minority shareholders from being squeezed out
by Goh Eng Yeow
September 11, 2017, 5:00 AM SGT
Almost 5,000 investors were apparently caught still holding Aztech Holdings shares when the company was delisted in February.
If you think that was just an oversight by a fairly large number of shareholders, think again. When Aztech launched a selective capital reduction scheme last month to buy back shares from them at the same price as for the earlier delisting exercise - 42 cents a share - enough of them cast dissenting votes to block the offer.
These dissenters were irked that they were being asked to part with their shares at only 40 per cent of Aztech's revalued net asset value (RNAV), even though the independent financial adviser (IFA), Stirling Coleman Capital, had assessed the offer as being "fair and reasonable".
The situation begs various questions: Isn't it absurd that so many people are stuck with shares they cannot monetise easily? And since so many of them still have Aztech shares, doesn't it make sense to keep the company listed? In any case, why didn't they fight harder to oppose the delisting move? That would surely have saved them the heartache they suffer now.
More details in http://www.straitstimes.com/business/rai...delistings
Specuvestor: Asset - Business - Structure.